Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

"This Case is Not Over": Death Row Prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal Still Fighting for his Life

By Liliana Segura, AlterNet. Posted April 19, 2008.


With the world's most famous death row prisoner recently denied a new trial, activists take to the streets on April 19th.
Advertisement

In a long-awaited ruling, last month the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied Pennsylvania death row prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal a new trial. The 2-3 decision came down nearly ten months after oral arguments in which judges were presented with key pieces of evidence regarding the shocking misconduct in his original trial -- most important among them the systemic racism, from jury selection to sentencing (not to mention the judge’s overheard statement that he was "going to help'em fry the nigger.") The arguments took place almost a year ago -- last May -- in a packed courtroom. Two decades after he was arrested for the shooting death of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner, this was the biggest development in Abu-Jamal's case since a federal judge discarded his death sentence (while keeping him on death row) in December 2001. The stakes on this day were high; it was as close as he had come to the possibility of a new trial.

Many who attended the hearing on May 17th came away with the impression that Abu-Jamal had a good shot. The cautious optimism of his supporters was shared by his lawyer, Robert R. Bryan. The judges had asked many questions that suggested they were open to considering much of the evidence that has thus far been dismissed, like the prosecution's deliberate removal of African Americans from the jury pool. In Bryan's opinion, the judges had been largely convinced by the arguments. "If the federal court follows the U.S. Constitution and law, we will be granted an entirely new jury trial," he speculated. "However, if the judges are affected by politics, then the outcome will be against us."

Months passed. When the ruling finally came down, on March 27th, the decision was 2 to 1: Mumia Abu-Jamal would not receive a new trial. But he would receive a new jury trial on whether the sentence should be life or death.

The obvious good news was that the Third Circuit upheld the elimination of Abu-Jamal's death sentence. The bad news: By upholding his conviction, the court condemned him to life in prison -- and that's assuming a jury does not hand down a new death sentence.

Mumia's supporters were angered and dismayed. Pam Africa, coordinator of the International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal announced a mass demonstration in Philadelphia to take place on April 19th. "We have absolutely no faith in the judicial system, but if Mumia does have a court proceeding, we will continue to mobilize to pack the courtroom and the streets in support of Mumia." The passion of Abu-Jamal's most vocal supporters is understandable given how close Mumia has come to being executed. Pennsylvania. Gov. Tom Ridge signed a death warrant for Mumia on October 13, 1999 and the years since have seen him literally fighting for his life.

Yet, Bryan disagrees that the court ruling was a total loss. In a phone interview following the decision, he called the ruling "a mixed bag." "First the fact that the court ruled favorably regarding the death penalty is good … anytime there's a victory over the death penalty, it's good." That said, "the court not granting an entirely new jury trial on the issue of innocence or guilt is bad. Obviously." Whatever the odds, he maintains that his ultimate goal is to get a new trial for Abu-Jamal. "I want him to go home to his family."

One of the reasons Bryan is so optimistic is the opinion written by the dissenting judge, Judge Thomas Ambro. Forty-one pages long, it is the single most important opinion that has been written in Abu-Jamal's case. "I have never seen as powerful a dissent as that," Bryan said. "He really took the other two judges to task." Indeed, the first line of Judge Ambrose's dissent reads: "Excluding even a single person from a jury because of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of our Constitution." On that basis alone, Abu-Jamal deserves a new trial.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: criminal justice system, racism, death penalty, batson v. kentucky, third circuit court of ap, mumia abu-jamal

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Can Gov. Rendell commute his sentence to life in prison?
Posted by: war_on_tara on Apr 20, 2008 8:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who hates the death penalty, I've never been able to figure out the fascination some have with this character. All too typically, this article doesn't even bother to go over the facts of the case.

It's a sad commentary that he has become the "most famous death row prisoner in the world" - our side should not be wasting our time with him and should focus on others. How about for starters, death row prisoners in Texas and other places who are actually innocent of the crime???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I QUESTION THE COMPETENCE OF THE SUPREME COURT
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Apr 21, 2008 1:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They just defined "significant pain". How did they do that? We can end capital punishment. Nurses & doctors are necessary to carry it out, pronounce a person dead and sign a death certificate. All we need is for them to quit. It can't go on without them present. Face it we don't execute that many people, just TOO many. Their absence would make it impossible to carry out the death penalty. It's not all about the Supreme Court or the states. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Facts of the case?
Posted by: jeffkaye on Apr 23, 2008 8:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article doesn't purport to go over the facts of the case, but looks at the decision by the Appeals Court.

There is more vitriol and hatred thrown at Abu Jamal than any other individual I know of in America today. He is a convicted "cop killer", thereby putting him outside the pale. He is a radical black man. The combination is political dynamite, and Ms. Segura is to be congratulated to be covering a case that would be career suicide for many in the mainstream media.

As to Jamal, there has been a lot of exculpatory evidence presented in his case, along with the juridical shenanigans and racist practice to which the author alludes. Some witnesses (Veronica Jones and Pamela Jenkins) have rescinded their testimony from the original trial and now say they were coerced into lying; and there is sworn confession of Arnold Beverly that he shot police officer Daniel Faulkner, not Mumia, part of crooked cop/mob hit against Faulkner for interfering with their racket. But none of this exculpatory evidence has been allowed to come to trial. (For a review, see this article by the Partisan Defense Committee.

Or you could pursue the following:

Through prodigious research, Schiffmann has located a number of photos taken by press photographer Pedro Polakoff. Polakoff, who arrived on the scene 12 minutes after Faulkner's killing, produced at least 26 photos before the arrival of the Philadelphia Police Department's Mobile Crime Unit. Some of the photos are highlighted in Schiffmann's new book, Race Against Death. Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Black Revolutionary in White America.

What do these photos show? Well, for one, the prosecution asserted that Mumia killed Faulkner by standing over the already wounded officer and unloading several shots from a .38 revolver. However, the Polakoff photos show a clean trickle of blood on the pavement, not the splatter of blood or cement damage that one would expect from the firing of such a weapon. Or this: Polakoff told Schiffmann that officers at the crime scene said they believed the shooter was sitting in the passenger seat of Billy Cook's Volkswagen, supporting the argument that a third person was at the crime scene.

There's a lot one could learn, if one took the time.

What I want to know is why a government that framed up and was implicated in the murder of a many black radicals over a generation ago gets off scot-free?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]